Bill Williams and his strategies... - page 15
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Googled the information, but the only thing I understood was that MT is a rather "secret project" )) very little information, while other platforms have much more information
Oats are expensive these days. And they charge for advertising.
And you should be sneering all the time...
;)
Share your experiences...
:о)
There is virtually no difference between tick volumes and real volumes. That's what the sainted father Bill Williams said. Tick volumes are the result of an instrument's volatility. An instrument's volatility is the result of the volume of concluded deals. Consequently, there is a strong stable correlation, close to 1, between the tick and real volumes. If you are sure that these are absolutely different things - prove it. The figure shows just the opposite, tick and real volumes are almost exactly the same. If real volumes meant completely different, they would not be so similar to tick volumes.
I don't want to argue - if you believe so, let it be so, but for some reason I believe that no one knows the real trading volumes,
the market moves in a low-volume market - the price went quite steadily upwards, only to fall back down in a few bars.
-
In addition to the previous post, in order to define the concept of volumes and the most trivial concept of how the market works, you can try to simulate the market with a primitive model:
- let's have 10 people, 5 of them have 100 EUR and the other 5 have 100 USD.
- in the initial state, the price is 1EUR=1USD.
- All 10 people want to exchange their money at a certain profit, i.e. nobody is willing to do it at the rate of 1:1.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
How would the exchange rate look like if
1. one of the participants leaves with its money in USD, and comes back a few hours later?
2. one of the exchangers left with their USD money, and a few hours later came back, but somewhere along the way managed to buy another 100USD?
In addition to the previous post, in order to define the concept of volumes and the most trivial notion of how the market works, we can try to simulate the market with a primitive model:
- let's have 10 people, 5 of them have 100 EUR and the other 5 have 100 USD.
- in the initial state, the price is 1EUR=1USD.
- All 10 people want to exchange their money at a certain profit, i.e. nobody is willing to do it at the rate of 1:1.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
How would the exchange rate look like if
1. one of the participants leaves with its money in USD, and comes back a few hours later?
2. One of the exchangers left with its money in USD, and a few hours later came back, but managed to buy another 100USD somewhere on the way?
you know, this is a very good problem. i would say it should be put here
It prompts a lot of reasoning. and not just straightforward answers, but also psychology.
you know, this is a very good task. i would say it should be put up here
It brings up a lot of thinking. and not just straight answers, but psychology as well.
I wanted to post there, but I think the title of the topic is: brain training problems not related to trading in any way.
if you want to copy my post and add your wording to a new thread, i'd be happy to join the discussion
I don't want to argue - if you believe that, so be it, but for some reason I believe that no one knows the real volumes of trade
And if they did, so what? ))) The acceleration of price changes and acceleration of changes in volumes (even in ticks) in combination provide much more valuable information for decision-making. I specifically looked at your section of the chart in the terminal and I want to tell you that this drop was clearly outlined even at the point marked with a vertical line. )))
And if they did, so what?
All right, that's my point: knowledge of real volumes is of little consequence, as the number of market participants and their intentions are constantly changing.
As for the acceleration - I am dealing with this issue, but so far I have not come to a definite conclusion about how to calculate the speed/acceleration of prices. Of course, on the history you can see how the market behaved, where it was moving confidently and where it was stagnating, but on the zero bar we do not see any volumes or High and Low, only Open and price
That's right, that's my point: knowledge of real volumes is of little importance, because the number of market participants and their intentions are constantly changing.
As for the acceleration - I am dealing with this topic, but I have not yet come to a definite conclusion on how to calculate the speed/acceleration of prices. Of course, on the history you can see how the market behaved, where it was moving confidently and where it was stagnating, but on the zero bar we do not see any volumes or High and Low, only Open and price
I think it could be a problem in the sense of the zero bar, if it were not for the inertia of the market. ))) It's hard to imagine the price reversing sharply on the zero bar. ))) Usually the unambiguous hints of this event come in advance, a few bars before the reversal. )))